Something dawned on me today while driving my M3 on a rare day off. While stretching the legs on the wonderful S65 engine today I wondered, hmmmm. I know the Porsche 911 is a better and faster car if driven well. More rewarding to the driver as well, but which engine would you rather have? Based strictly (997)911 Carrera or Carrera S vs M3 S65, which engines are better and why? No (991) 3.8 liter discussion as that engine is ridiculous. I will entertain the 3.4 liter argument. I definitely wanna hear the 2009 911 DI engines compared. I want to keep this as much an apples to apples comparison as possible. I'd like to hear fuel economy, reliability etc. Everything under the sun engine related.
I still lust for a 911 but I KNOW I would miss this engine in our M3's. 911 is the better car, probably. Daily Driver, probably not but I don't want to re-hash those arguments. Instead keep this strictly internal combustion engine related. I'm thinking advantage M3 here but I'd like to hear everybody else's thoughts.

putting aside the mezger block, in my mind there's no question that the M3 engine wins in overall power, smoothness, willingness to rev, flatness of torque curve / tractability, and of course sound. I would also say it wins in reliability when you consider the number of engines that blew up (not literally) due to faulty intermediate shafts on early 997 cars (mostly 2005 but some 2006 cars). however, the Porsche flat six wins in fuel efficiency, especially the DI motors.

For me, it is less the mechanical and power components, and more the aural experience. Power bands and torque curves completely aside, there is nothing more raw or visceral than hearing an engine run through it's rev-band in a loud, brash and blaring fashion; and the S65B40 delivers this in spades. I even prefer it over the racket (which is also exhilarating) from the V-10 of the E60 M5!

If money were no object though, I would own both in a heartbeat

__________________

try { Life.Live(); } catch (Experience exp) { Console.WriteLine(exp.ToString(); } finally { Brian.Dispose(); }
"There are only 10 kinds of people in the world; those that read binary, and those that don't."

Actually, my first '01 e46 M3 engine blew up, I had the car at the shop for almost 3 months, I think this engine, the V8 delivers more a flat curve and power smoothly, don't know much about mezger blocks, but owning 3 M's and a 991 due delivery on November, both are fantastic engines and at the top of the game, just hope the F80/82 delivers what is expected of an M engine

putting aside the mezger block, in my mind there's no question that the M3 engine wins in overall power, smoothness, willingness to rev, flatness of torque curve / tractability, and of course sound. I would also say it wins in reliability when you consider the number of engines that blew up (not literally) due to faulty intermediate shafts on early 997 cars (mostly 2005 but some 2006 cars). however, the Porsche flat six wins in fuel efficiency, especially the DI motors.

Could not have said it any better. This is dead on accurate as can be.

The S65 is argueably BMWs best engine...maybe the best theyve ever built. IMO, that means you need to compare it to Porsche's best, or one of its best. The 3.6 liter 997.1 GT3 engine was a marvel (415 hp), the 3.8 liter engine (435/450 hp) was even better, and the RS 4.0 engine (500 hp) is simply nothing short of a masterpiece that few engines can match in any aspect under the sun. Those 3 engines provide it all from smooth linear power delivery to top end pull, torque, sound...you name it.
This comparison makes no sense really...you cede the 3.8 liter in the 991 is a better engine, so you pick prob their worst engine to compare to BMWs arguable best...what good is it comparing if youre not apple to apples on best vs. best?
I can understand not comparing to the 4.0, thats just unfair, but the 3.6/3.8 would be essentially what would be apples to apples.

FYI, a 4.0 blew on the track yesterday dumping oil everywhere and my lowly S65 seems to do just fine with most 911's (including gt3's) and had a 991s behind me and I lost him (advanced run group so no rookies) and my car has only an exhaust and tune so nothing crazy there and am right around 60 track days with it so its durability shouldn't be in question either and yes I like run-on sentences

The S65 is argueably BMWs best engine...maybe the best theyve ever built. IMO, that means you need to compare it to Porsche's best, or one of its best. The 3.6 liter 997.1 GT3 engine was a marvel (415 hp), the 3.8 liter engine (435/450 hp) was even better, and the RS 4.0 engine (500 hp) is simply nothing short of a masterpiece that few engines can match in any aspect under the sun. Those 3 engines provide it all from smooth linear power delivery to top end pull, torque, sound...you name it.
This comparison makes no sense really...you succede the 3.8 liter in the 991 is a better engine, so you pick prob their worst engine to compare to BMWs arguable best...what good is it comparing if youre not apple to apples on best vs. best?
I can understand not comparing to the 4.0, thats just unfair, but the 3.6/3.8 would be essentially what would be apples to apples.

this is pathetic. why don't we compare the S65 to Ferrari's best engine of all time while we're at it? there comes a point at which two cars are in such vastly different price categories that they can't be compared with any expectation of fairness. the GT3 is essentially twice as expensive as the M3. do you really still think that this is apples to apples? how convenient that you write off the P-car that is less expensive (though still in a materially higher price category) as opposed to acknowledging that BMW has a much better engine, and at a lower price point to boot. and the 991 motor was excluded because that came out 6 years after the S65. please go enjoy your Porsche and don't bother posting such nonsense.

but while you brought it up, the torque curve on the GT3 motors is not as flat as the S65, contrary to what you said.

The S65 is argueably BMWs best engine...maybe the best theyve ever built. IMO, that means you need to compare it to Porsche's best, or one of its best. The 3.6 liter 997.1 GT3 engine was a marvel (415 hp), the 3.8 liter engine (435/450 hp) was even better, and the RS 4.0 engine (500 hp) is simply nothing short of a masterpiece that few engines can match in any aspect under the sun. Those 3 engines provide it all from smooth linear power delivery to top end pull, torque, sound...you name it.
This comparison makes no sense really...you succede the 3.8 liter in the 991 is a better engine, so you pick prob their worst engine to compare to BMWs arguable best...what good is it comparing if youre not apple to apples on best vs. best?
I can understand not comparing to the 4.0, thats just unfair, but the 3.6/3.8 would be essentially what would be apples to apples.

....who would have guessed you would be in here?

Did you ever think for just one moment that he is looking to compare the engines on the cars that he is contemplating buying? No, you immediately have to dig in even tighter on the Porsche nutsack. I have never seen anything like it.

OP - every engine in every Porsche ever made was built with the hands of God. The engineering and craftsmanship is far better than anything ever produced by anyone in this universe. The engineers at all of the F1 shops are simply in awe of everything that Porsche puts on the table and only wish they could be even half as remarkable as those put out by the boys in Stuttgart. Please sell any car that you have that does not have the Porsche crest on it. Otherwise, you are clearly just pissing in the wind. Thanks for listening,

this is pathetic. why don't we compare the S65 to Ferrari's best engine of all time while we're at it? there comes a point at which two cars are in such vastly different price categories that they can't be compared with any expectation of fairness. the GT3 is essentially twice as expensive as the M3. do you really still think that this is apples to apples? how convenient that you write off the P-car that is less expensive (though still in a materially higher price category) as opposed to acknowledging that BMW has a much better engine, and at a lower price point to boot. and the 991 motor was excluded because that came out 6 years after the S65. please go enjoy your Porsche and don't bother posting such nonsense.

but while you brought it up, the torque curve on the GT3 motors is not as flat as the S65, contrary to what you said.

Where did I say it had a flat tq curve...maybe if your reading comprehension were a bit better youd see I never said anything like that. Keep making up things though...that will get you far.
And again, I never said anything about the 3.8 in the 991...the GT3 motors mentioned are as old if not older than the S65.

Where did I say it had a flat tq curve...maybe if your reading comprehension were a bit better youd see I never said anything like that. Keep making up things though...that will get you far.
And again, I never said anything about the 3.8 in the 991...the GT3 motors mentioned are as old if not older than the S65.

Nope, the 4.0 RS engine is not as old or older than the S65. And yes, you did bring up the 991. It's pretty clear what your agenda is.

Maybe not what you are looking for, but I own both an E90 M3 and a Cayman R (3.4 DFI). While I love the cayman for the track, the power output and sound of the E90 is far more impressive than the R. Its not that I don't appreciate the sound of a Porsche motor running through its RPM range, its just that the BMW motor is so much more impressive in sound and speed with which is gathers speed.

Before the M3, I had an S5 and that motor was completely lame compared to the M3. It sounded slow and lethargic. Back then, I traded my S5 for a friends M3 for a day and the motor was what won me over.

Maybe not what you are looking for, but I own both an E90 M3 and a Cayman R (3.4 DFI). While I love the cayman for the track, the power output and sound of the E90 is far more impressive than the R. Its not that I don't appreciate the sound of a Porsche motor running through its RPM range, its just that the BMW motor is so much more impressive in sound and speed with which is gathers speed.

Before the M3, I had an S5 and that motor was completely lame compared to the M3. It sounded slow and lethargic. Back then, I traded my S5 for a friends M3 for a day and the motor was what won me over.

Totally agree! The music produced by the S65 in my M3 beats the sound in the 991 C2S hands down. Regular 911s don't sound all that good. U will need at least a 997 GT3 or a Turbo for that. When test driving the 991, i kept getting irritated by the induction note of their latest flat 6 and din think i was willing to trade in my S65 for that no matter how quick it goes around a track.

Did you ever think for just one moment that he is looking to compare the engines on the cars that he is contemplating buying? No, you immediately have to dig in even tighter on the Porsche nutsack. I have never seen anything like it.

OP - every engine in every Porsche ever made was built with the hands of God. The engineering and craftsmanship is far better than anything ever produced by anyone in this universe. The engineers at all of the F1 shops are simply in awe of everything that Porsche puts on the table and only wish they could be even half as remarkable as those put out by the boys in Stuttgart. Please sell any car that you have that does not have the Porsche crest on it. Otherwise, you are clearly just pissing in the wind. Thanks for listening,

The S65 is argueably BMWs best engine...maybe the best theyve ever built. IMO, that means you need to compare it to Porsche's best, or one of its best. The 3.6 liter 997.1 GT3 engine was a marvel (415 hp), the 3.8 liter engine (435/450 hp) was even better, and the RS 4.0 engine (500 hp) is simply nothing short of a masterpiece that few engines can match in any aspect under the sun. Those 3 engines provide it all from smooth linear power delivery to top end pull, torque, sound...you name it.
This comparison makes no sense really...you succede the 3.8 liter in the 991 is a better engine, so you pick prob their worst engine to compare to BMWs arguable best...what good is it comparing if youre not apple to apples on best vs. best?
I can understand not comparing to the 4.0, thats just unfair, but the 3.6/3.8 would be essentially what would be apples to apples.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

Where did I say it had a flat tq curve...maybe if your reading comprehension were a bit better youd see I never said anything like that. Keep making up things though...that will get you far.
And again, I never said anything about the 3.8 in the 991...the GT3 motors mentioned are as old if not older than the S65.

well, as long as you're making this personal and questioning my reading comprehension, I would first point out what I bolded above, "smooth linear power delivery." please tell me what you mean by that, because if linear power delivery means something other than a smooth torque curve, I'm stumped. I'm all ears, professor.

and secondly, you absolutely did bring up the 991. what am I missing? you said, "you succede the 3.8 in the 991 is a better engine". I don't know what elementary school you went to, but there's no such word as succede. and it isn't a spelling error, because "succeed" wouldn't make sense in that context. I think what you meant was "concede." and that proves my previous point about you bringing up the 3.8 in the 991.

for your own benefit, here's the definition of concede according to Merriam-Webster:

well, as long as you're making this personal and questioning my reading comprehension, I would first point out what I bolded above, "smooth linear power delivery." please tell me what you mean by that, because if linear power delivery means something other than a smooth torque curve, I'm stumped. I'm all ears, professor.

and secondly, you absolutely did bring up the 991. what am I missing? you said, "you succede the 3.8 in the 991 is a better engine". I don't know what elementary school you went to, but there's no such word as succede. and it isn't a spelling error, because "succeed" wouldn't make sense in that context. I think what you meant was "concede." and that proves my previous point about you bringing up the 3.8 in the 991.

for your own benefit, here's the definition of concede according to Merriam-Webster:

please read this post (and your previous posts) carefully before taking any further personal shots at me and embarrassing yourself in the process.

Not making anything personal but when youre typing from a phone...its sometimes difficut to correct everything. and meant to type "cede"...as in surrendering a particular point.
Since youre the one trying to now play professor...hwo else would you describe the power of a GT3?? Maybe we can get into logarithmic functions and theory a bit?

I more or less agree with the points on why the S65 is a better engine than the 3.4l Porsche f6, but it bears mentioning that Porsche provides more or less equal performance with less displacement, two less cylinders, and a heck of a lot better fuel economy.

if you step up to even the worst GT3 engine, the 3.6, it is better than the S65 in pretty much every category already mentioned, IMO. maybe we can quibble on reliability because of the RMS/IMS issue. and price, since the engine only comes in a car whose msrp is 2x that of the M3

Not making anything personal but when youre typing from a phone...its sometimes difficut to correct everything. and meant to type "cede"...as in surrendering a particular point.
Since youre the one trying to now play professor...hwo else would you describe the power of a GT3?? Maybe we can get into logarithmic functions and theory a bit?

please just stop. I will again point out your misstatements, but this is the last time as I'm done debating with you.

first, you did in fact make it personal when you insulted my reading comprehension, which is unnecessary and also ridiculous considering you were wrong about what you actually said. my last post proved that. second, I know that you meant concede - did you not read what I just wrote? it's just embarrassing for you because not only is succede not a word (sorry to bring up improper vocabulary, but you were the one who turned this personal), but admitting that you called the 991's motor into question is only proving my point that you were wrong when you said you never brought it up.